Republic of Barbados and Charles' visit

36

Presumably that's a matter for the Bajan people.

And the award will be for the monarchy in general (Prince Charles is representing the Queen) not the individual.

Yes of course its a sop.

As Winnietheworm has said, it’s up to the people of Barbados.

"Many Barbadians, including the Caribbean Movement for Peace and Integration, feel that the royal family’s only role in the handover should be to apologize for its endorsement of more than 300 years of slave trade and pay out to Barbados in the form of reparations.

“If you are breaking with the monarchy, then you cannot invite them to be part of that process,” the activist group’s general secretary, David Denny, told Barbados Today, alongside the announcement of peaceful protests during the republic celebrations. “I am not saying that you cannot invite the prince to Barbados, but not for our ceremony for Barbados to become a republic. It is a contradiction. It is not an honourable thing to do and I think it is an insult to Barbadian people.”"

www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a38376037/prince-charles-barbados-queen-removed-as-head-of-state/

Hearing what was said on the news this morning I couldn't help wondering if Barbados will be part of the Chinese empire in 20 years time.

It was a weird and sycophantic invitation - he absolutely shouldn’t be there. But people lose their heads around the monarchy - it’s all very odd.

Well the republican group would say that, wouldn't they!!

Handover ceremonies are very much the norm. No compulsion to have one of course - that's entirely up to the departing nation. And this one chose to have one.

Should he have turned down the invitation? Wouldn't that have looked churlish?

The point is that some people in Barbados did not want him to be given that honour. You think everyone agrees on things on any country?

it just seems a bit of an odd thing to have him there

Presumably there as the representative of the existing head of state (i.e. the Queen) at the time of the transfer of power. If the Queen had been in better health I imagine she would have been there rather than Charles.

Surely it was their decision to invite Prince Charles? He could hardly have refused.

Surely he could have went but not accepted the award? No one would have known as these things are sorted out long before it is made public.

He did the right thing going. It was their choice to invite him. It would have been really rude and undiplomatic to refuse.

What is it with these Windsors and their obsessive need for awards? Cringe.

@ChurchofLatterDayPaints yes they need constant fawning over.

It's an historic occasion because Barbados asked to stay in the Commonwealth even after following the people's will to become a republic, and the Commonwealth agreed - setting a new precedent that a country can remove the UK monarch as head of state and still remain in the Commonwealth without having to leave and reapply for membership. Charles is there to represent the Commonwealth. Of course not every Barbadian likes the decisions that were made, but for god's sake get a grip of the international context before weighing in.

for god's sake get a grip of the international context before weighing in

Not sure who that's addressed to, but "for god's sake" calm down and realise the damage these people do. Regardless of "context" there's nothing to reward them for.

Charles was invited to the peaceful transfer of power and accepted - what other diplomatic response is there? Peaceful transfers of power are very rare - we can be proud of this. Charles acknowledged the wrongs of the past, which is even more unusual. OP you sound a little over emotional about this - you do realise that you can be a republican and against the institution without thinking that the individuals are terrible people. Charles wasn’t involved in the slave trade - he can’t apologise as of he was, it would sound patronising and insincere. He’s just a normal person who didn’t choose his role - which is the whole reason for opposing having a monarch, not that they are dreadful people.

It is not a peaceful transfer of power. What power did the RF have over Barabados?

you do realise that you can be a republican and against the institution without thinking that the individuals are terrible people

You can't, actually.

www.theroyalobserver.com/p/netflix-documentary-show-prince-charles-friendship-jimmy-savile

"On Savile's 80th birthday, Charles marked the occasion with "an extraordinary gift and an even more extraordinary letter. As well as a box of Cohiba cigars, Savile enclosed a pair of personal cufflinks and a note which Kay claims "eulogises" the former Top of the Pops host.
Charles reportedly wrote: "Nobody will ever know what you have done for this country Jimmy. This is to go some way in thanking you for that."

Then there's the paedophile priest Peter Ball.

So what's PC really done for our country?

And what's he really done for Barbados or the Commonwealth?

The RF will carry on handing out and receiving meaningless accolades because that's what they do.

It's just a shame Barbados didn't make a stronger statement.